Protection from wintertime rainfall reduces nutrient losses and greenhouse gas emissions during the decomposition of poultry and horse manure-based amendments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Manure-based soil amendments (herein “amendments”) are important fertility sources, but differences among amendment types and management can significantly affect their nutrient value and environmental impacts. A 6-month in situ decomposition experiment was conducted to determine how protection from wintertime rainfall affected nutrient losses and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in poultry (broiler chicken and turkey) and horse amendments. Changes in total nutrient concentration were measured every 3 months, changes in ammonium (NH4+) and nitrate (NO3−) concentrations every month, and GHG emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O) every 7–14 days. Poultry amendments maintained higher nutrient concentrations (except for K), higher emissions of CO2 and N2O, and lower CH4 emissions than horse amendments. Exposing amendments to rainfall increased total N and NH4+ losses in poultry amendments, P losses in turkey and horse amendments, and K losses and cumulative N2O emissions for all amendments. However, it did not affect CO2 or CH4 emissions. Overall, rainfall exposure would decrease total N inputs by 37% (horse), 59% (broiler chicken), or 74% (turkey) for a given application rate (wet weight basis) after 6 months of decomposition, with similar losses for NH4+ (69–96%), P (41–73%), and K (91–97%). This study confirms the benefits of facilities protected from rainfall to reduce nutrient losses and GHG emissions during amendment decomposition.Implications: The impact of rainfall protection on nutrient losses and GHG emissions was monitored during the decomposition of broiler chicken, turkey, and horse manure-based soil amendments. Amendments exposed to rainfall had large ammonium and potassium losses, resulting in a 37–74% decrease in N inputs when compared with amendments protected from rainfall. Nitrous oxide emissions were also higher with rainfall exposure, although it had no effect on carbon dioxide and methane emissions. Overall, this work highlights the benefits of rainfall protection during amendment decomposition to reduce nutrient losses and GHG emissions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".